KEF R3 Speaker Review

[Sancus]

o one thing I forgot to mention is the KH 120 sounded more like a point source than the R3, I attribute that to the fact that the R3's woofer to midwoofer crossover is at 400Hz, splitting many fundamental frequencies between the 2.

This point source thing is something I've only ever heard people say with reference to the R3 specifically and some(non-coaxial) floorstanders with large separation between the tweeter and woofers at close listening distances. People don't say it about Genelecs for example, and those also have separate woofers with a crossover point as high as 500hz for the smaller Ones.

I do wonder if the practice of putting woofers both above and below the tweeter mitigates it and so only the R3 is particularly prone because it has the single woofer. But I also wonder how much of this effect may be sighted bias.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

This point source thing is something I've only ever heard people say with reference to the R3 specifically and some(non-coaxial) floorstanders with large separation between the tweeter and woofers at close listening distances. People don't say it about Genelecs for example, and those also have separate woofers with a crossover point as high as 500hz for the smaller Ones.

I do wonder if the practice of putting woofers both above and below the tweeter mitigates it and so only the R3 is particularly prone because it has the single woofer. But I also wonder how much of this effect may be sighted bias.

I have the R7 but i had the R300 which use the 11th as LS50.

The 12th gen is much better, its pretty obvious in the first second hear the better extension for example, more control and lower distortion in mid range.





I always wondered if the R7 gonna sound less as point source than my r300 but having the r7, the tower blend very well in my room...

 

[aarons915]

This point source thing is something I've only ever heard people say with reference to the R3 specifically and some(non-coaxial) floorstanders with large separation between the tweeter and woofers at close listening distances. People don't say it about Genelecs for example, and those also have separate woofers with a crossover point as high as 500hz for the smaller Ones.

I do wonder if the practice of putting woofers both above and below the tweeter mitigates it and so only the R3 is particularly prone because it has the single woofer. But I also wonder how much of this effect may be sighted bias.

Yeah I don't know either but since being used to the Q150 and then the LS50 for a few years, any speaker that isn't well integrated sticks out to me now, so much that it's distracting to listen to anything but a coaxial or a well integrated line-source speaker with a waveguide like a Revel or Neumann. I haven't heard the Genelec One series so not sure how I would feel about that but I wonder if I'd notice the same thing, especially since the woofers are partially obstructed. I don't think a single vs dual woofer matters much, if anything dual woofers are a bit worse to my ears since the vocals appear to come from a larger line source than the single woofer in the R3. I was recently at a best buy and listened to the R5 and noticed the issue immediately, the odd thing was that the Q series towers sounded fine as a point source. I'd like to see KEF use 2.5 ways more for their towers for that reason or in a 3-way use the 2-way driver similar to the Q150 and cross them over around 150Hz, both options should play loud with low distortion while retaining a point-source presentation into the low frequencies where localization is hard for us to discern.

 

[Sancus]

I haven't heard the Genelec One series so not sure how I would feel about that but I wonder if I'd notice the same thing, especially since the woofers are partially obstructed.

Well I can say that I definitely cannot hear any difference in location for low frequency vocals even at pretty close distances(0.5m). The center-to-woofer distances are very short though and the slot design is intentional as it allows a larger wave guide and modifies the woofer directivity so it matches better. The whole design is described in a white paper.

 

[Chromatischism]

Yeah I don't know either but since being used to the Q150 and then the LS50 for a few years, any speaker that isn't well integrated sticks out to me now, so much that it's distracting to listen to anything but a coaxial or a well integrated line-source speaker with a waveguide like a Revel or Neumann. I haven't heard the Genelec One series so not sure how I would feel about that but I wonder if I'd notice the same thing, especially since the woofers are partially obstructed. I don't think a single vs dual woofer matters much, if anything dual woofers are a bit worse to my ears since the vocals appear to come from a larger line source than the single woofer in the R3. I was recently at a best buy and listened to the R5 and noticed the issue immediately, the odd thing was that the Q series towers sounded fine as a point source. I'd like to see KEF use 2.5 ways more for their towers for that reason or in a 3-way use the 2-way driver similar to the Q150 and cross them over around 150Hz, both options should play loud with low distortion while retaining a point-source presentation into the low frequencies where localization is hard for us to discern.

Does a center speaker sound more like a point source than phantom center with your LS50s?

 

[thewas]

This point source thing is something I've only ever heard people say with reference to the R3 specifically and some(non-coaxial) floorstanders with large separation between the tweeter and woofers at close listening distances. People don't say it about Genelecs for example, and those also have separate woofers with a crossover point as high as 500hz for the smaller Ones.

I do wonder if the practice of putting woofers both above and below the tweeter mitigates it and so only the R3 is particularly prone because it has the single woofer. But I also wonder how much of this effect may be sighted bias.

Another possible reason could maybe be a higher crossover order on the active Ones compared to the passive R3.

 

[aarons915]

Does a center speaker sound more like a point source than phantom center with your LS50s?

I've honestly never tried it so can't say. Even with stereo I prefer to upmix to 3.1 with the center about 3db lower than the fronts.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

And another posibility is the Ls50 doesn't needs to try to sound a point source because the speaker is that..., so anything that is not a '' point source '' shouldn't sounds like that, now the challenge is not a speaker which is point source sounds like a point source speaker... the challenge is a not a point source speaker sound close to a point source..

The kef Q tower series are something like that, the ls50 with surround + woofers doing bass. But that came with a lot of problem.

Now if you wanna just a point source too, the Q series towers and Kef blades, R series and Reference series aren't that, genelec one aren't point source as ls50, the ls50 is just that..
Tannoy too? but i prefer much having a 3-way that limiting the design to having a point source..

 

[ernestcarl]

The original LS50 also fatigue me but EQ'ing the 2-5k range fixes that. The KH120 don't measure bright, I think it's simply due to the mismatch between the direct sound and the reflections, almost like it's confusing to the auditory system where something like the LS50 simply accentuates certain frequencies and causes fatigue after long sessions

A detailed cross-analysis of the strength of the reflections obtained using your LS50 and KH120 (on-axis and off-axis measurements) in your own personal setup may help illuminate the situation better. Which band or group of frequencies the reflections are strongest and when they occur in time, and from where (reflective surface); also the decay etc… Though, that is a lot of work. I do think some tailored HF shelving in the KH120 may have been enough to remedy/at least significantly reduce the much faster rate of fatigue you were getting with these monitors. Simple swept measurements/reading of the frequency response could give one the impression that the monitors in position are “not bright” currently, but you and I know there’s more to it than that since there is not enough information there to really conclusively say what’s really going on. Directivity is a possible strong contributor to the big difference in your experience, though, as you say so yourself.

Without detailed suite of measurements to compare and analyze, we’re still just kind of guessing.

 

[tifune]

I've honestly never tried it so can't say. Even with stereo I prefer to upmix to 3.1 with the center about 3db lower than the fronts.

Interesting - I do the same. Just curious, why do you think you prefer it that way? For me, I think even the upmixers I like (Auro3D if you have height later, Dolby w/ Center Spread for no height + front wide, otherwise just Auro2D) push WAY too much into the center channel and it sort of becomes mono + 360 degree reverb. Turning down the center maintains the upmixing qualities and it starts to sound "more stereo" again.

 

[aarons915]

A detailed cross-analysis of the strength of the reflections obtained using your LS50 and KH120 (on-axis and off-axis measurements) in your own personal setup may help illuminate the situation better. Which band or group of frequencies the reflections are strongest and when they occur in time, and from where (reflective surface); also the decay etc… Though, that is a lot of work. I do think some tailored HF shelving in the KH120 may have been enough to remedy/at least significantly reduce the much faster rate of fatigue you were getting with these monitors. Simple swept measurements/reading of the frequency response could give one the impression that the monitors in position are “not bright” currently, but you and I know there’s more to it than that since there is not enough information there to really conclusively say what’s really going on. Directivity is a possible strong contributor to the big difference in your experience, though, as you say so yourself.

Without detailed suite of measurements to compare and analyze, we’re still just kind of guessing.

Yeah I know I didn't exhaust every possibility but I did a lot more than most people would try. I tried both a 1-2db high shelf after 1k and also the treble trim switch on the back that rolls the treble off, it might have helped a bit but not nearly enough and it dulled the highs in the process. My specific setup is fairly normal for the US, with sidewall reflections and 8ft ceilings. I generally EQ to eliminate any kind of peaks because that is generally what causes fatigue but the KH120 already measure great except the difference in vertical reflections, which again isn't a problem when used how they're supposed to be used in a near field setup.

Interesting - I do the same. Just curious, why do you think you prefer it that way? For me, I think even the upmixers I like (Auro3D if you have height later, Dolby w/ Center Spread for no height + front wide, otherwise just Auro2D) push WAY too much into the center channel and it sort of becomes mono + 360 degree reverb. Turning down the center maintains the upmixing qualities and it starts to sound "more stereo" again.

The Upmixer that really got me liking music in 3 channel was DTS Neo 6 Music mode, which I don't think is around anymore. It doesn't seem any different than any of the Upmixers except the center was about 3-5db lower than the mains I believe, it takes away some of the stereo imaging, adds spaciousness and doesn't draw attention to itself. I guess I prefer it because I try to set up my system to just listen to the music, stereo imaging isn't a thing when listening to live music so I try to reduce that effect in my room as well.

 

[Fahzz]

Thinking about moving from original LS50's to R3's.

I have a question about heat. My room setup is far from ideal, and the LS 50's have been located about a foot away from "old school" radiators (not baseboards), and that's where the R3's will have to be placed as well.

Will the wooden veneer if the R3's suffer any deleterious effects from being this close to a heat source? Thanks.

 

[tifune]

Thinking about moving from original LS50's to R3's.

I have a question about heat. My room setup is far from ideal, and the LS 50's have been located about a foot away from "old school" radiators (not baseboards), and that's where the R3's will have to be placed as well.

Will the wooden veneer if the R3's suffer any deleterious effects from being this close to a heat source? Thanks.

If anyone knows, I have a similar question - one of my gloss black R3's is near windows, in the sun all day every day. Anything I can/should do to keep it nice & shiny?

 

[dshreter]

If anyone knows, I have a similar question - one of my gloss black R3's is near windows, in the sun all day every day. Anything I can/should do to keep it nice & shiny?

Not joking, you could use automotive car wax to help somewhat. Use something that doesn’t dry with a haze before wiping.

But really life is short. Use and enjoy the speakers, and if the paint fades so what.

 

[jendra]

Just recently bought a pair of these babies. So far I'm quite satisfied with them. Coming off from a pair of Vandersteen Model 2s they definitely throw a more focused center image. Thought I share a measurement as well in my living room.

 

[aarons915]

Just recently bought a pair of these babies. So far I'm quite satisfied with them. Coming off from a pair of Vandersteen Model 2s they definitely throw a more focused center image. Thought I share a measurement as well in my living room.

View attachment 151325

Looks like you need to slide the shadow flare in (small plastic waveguide around the midwoofer and woofer), a slight dip around 1k is evident when they aren't pushed in which looks like you have.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Maybe?
that measurement was with the umik 1? a little weird because the highs seems to be roll off

 

[jendra]

Looks like you need to slide the shadow flare in (small plastic waveguide around the midwoofer and woofer), a slight dip around 1k is evident when they aren't pushed in which looks like you have.

This was the first thing i tried but the shadow flare isn't giving in as easy as I thought. It's actually hard to push them in further.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

This was the first thing i tried but the shadow flare isn't giving in as easy as I thought. It's actually hard to push them in further.

but you already pushed them? or you push the shadow flare when he said that thing?
Push them with left and right thumb, i found extremely easy to push them inside

 

[jendra]

Maybe?
that measurement was with the umik 1? a little weird because the highs seems to be roll off
View attachment 151327

Yea it was with the umik